Technology

My first laptop was a Surface, so was my second, both having the magnetic Surface Connect port. Recently though, I bought a new Lenovo Thinkpad, which charges via USB C. My first thoughts were that the USB C was a lot less convenient. With a magnetic connector, I could just wave the cable at the port and more often than not, it would connect without me even having to look at it, whereas with the USB C port on the Lenovo, I actually have to tilt my head toward the side of the laptop and visually find the port before I can plug it in correctly. I know that USB C is tons more versatile than a proprietary port and especially more versatile than a proprietary and charging only port like the older MacBooks had, but IMO they're a lot more convenient for charging itself.

What do you think? Do you miss magnetic charging ports and do you feel about manufacturers including them in 2021? Especially curious about responses people who used/use one of the older MacBooks that had (from what I heard, never owned one) one of the best magnetic charging ports on the market.

If there was a campaign to make a version of the USB C or Thunderbolt connector that was magnetic, would you support it? Theoretically someone could just publish an open source design for a magnetic port that is pin compatible with USB C. As long as the open source project says it's just a generic 20-pin port that can carry whatever signal, there wouldn't be any licensing issues with the design itself, since some manufactures do have custom ports that can carry USB C or Thunderbolt signals, right.

Looking at screens for too long can cause eyestrain, but eyestrain existed long before screens. (Driving long distances is another cause, the Mayo Clinic notes.) Eyestrain may involve fatigue of the tiny muscles in and around our eyes, and people who get eyestrain may experience discomfort that includes headaches, blurry vision, watering of the eyes, and sensitivity to light.

There’s a rumor that the blue light from smartphones (or other screens) can ruin your vision, perhaps even leading to blindness, but it’s not backed up by evidence. “The amount of light coming from a computer has never been demonstrated to cause any eye disease,” the American Academy of Opththalmology states in an article on their website recommending against blue-light-blocking glasses. There is research that finds blue light can damage cells in certain lab conditions, but those conditions are very different from what happens in the actual cells of our retina.

Unfortunately, there are companies citing research like this to sell their blue-light-blocking glasses or screen overlays, but they aren’t selling a solution to a real problem. This happened to me recently after getting an eye test for glasses for all day looking at screens. The prescription is actually for vision correction (that's all) but guess what, the optometrist also sells glasses, and somehow I got hoodwinked into adding blue light lens coatings "to prevent eyestrain". This adds a considerable amount to the price. In future too I'll take my prescription and get quotes for glasses (including online) as the whole business seems to be a bit of a scam. I paid double the rate of a GP for the tests and got zero report back.

And regarding affecting sleep, the recommendation is to just have screens an inch or two further away - my screens are at 85 cm which is way further than the recommended 63 cm. In other words we should be better educated about how to use our eyes, and not necessarily just be sold blue light filter coatings on lenses.

See https://vitals.lifehacker.com/what-happens-to-your-eyes-when-you-stare-at-screens-all-1846593909

#technology #vision #myths #bluelight #optometrists

I found this while browsing Reddit, and going past the first reaction of "this is terrible" I think it can spark an interesting discussion on machine learning and how our own societal problems can end up creating bad habits and immortalizing those issues when building such systems.

So, what do you guys think about this?

It's pretty cool. It can use either blink or WebKit and has it's own lower level extension system that somewhat reminds me of firefox's XUL addons.

The reason why we as consumers get held to ransom by Big Tech is because they are the one's who create walled gardens of their apps to ensure it is very difficult to leave their service and to maintain any communication with your friends or family who stay behind. They count on that sticky network effect to hold you in place.

The world was not always like this, as we see with e-mail where any app can e-mail any other app. Neither was messaging as it was also once open.

So what we need is a protocol to be broadly supported that will connect anyone to any other app supporting that open protocol, but which allows end-to-end encryption. We need apps to support it, just like Hubzilla which built in a number of plugins to allow it to communicate with Diaspora, XMPP, Fediverse, etc all from one place.

What do we do about Big Tech like Facebook, Twitter, Google, Microsoft? Well either they must be mandated by law to build in this protocol support, or we as consumers must start voting with our choices and not make use of services that are walled gardens. Our future lies in an open interoperable Internet offering privacy. The future cannot be walled gardens separating us all.

From the link below the key columns are the License (how open is it for anyone to use without cost?) and End-To-End Encryption (can I use it privately?). From these requirements we can see that the following protocols could be suitable to consider:

• Bitmessage (Desktop P2)
• Briar (P2) but Android only
• Echo
• Jami (Desktop and Mobile P2P)
• Matrix (Desktop and Mobile Federated Client-Server)
• Ricochet (Desktop P2P)
• Signal (Centralised Desktop and Mobile)
• SIMPLE (more phones with SIP?)
• Tox (Desktop and Mobile P2P)
• XMPP (Desktop and Mobile Decentralized Client-Server)

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_instant_messaging_protocols

#technology #instantmessengers #interoprability #bigtech #privacy

What's new in the Google Chrome 78 release.

Tor released Snowflake, a system to defeat internet censorship. People who are censored can use Snowflake to access the internet. Their connection goes through Snowflake proxies, which are run by volunteers.